Note that Puppy applications are open source, however there a couple of exceptions. Version 0.9.8+ has Planmaker Free Edition spreadsheet editor, which is closed source freeware. Later versions of Puppy have Planmaker Free Edition (and Textmaker Free Edition) as PupGet packages. The license document is here (if Planmaker is installed). We need to be able to open and edit Excel-format spreadsheets, which Planmaker does admirably, and the Free Edition is just that, free, no embedded adverts, no usage restrictions (except for a limited maximum size that can be edited). I would like to do the right thing for the developer, Softmaker Software, though, and recommend that you consider the full edition if Planmaker is to be used for serious commercial purposes.

Some releases of Puppy have the Opera web browser, which is closed source but free.

Some releases of Puppy include the Macromedia (now Adobe) Flash plugin for the web browser. This is closed source but free. The distribution licence requires that I include the logo and a link to the company site.

(This is the original page with minor corrections of the bullet marks in the cited GPL section 3.)

There are quite a few different licenses in Puppy software
Mozilla, LGPL, BSD, etc ...
All of which are much more relaxed.

Barry suggests Puppy conforms to LGPL

"I'm far from knowledgeable about this, but isn't LGPL somewhat more lax about commercial content -- I'm thinking that we have Opera and Planmaker, both closed source, though free.
Also, the CD that I sell has lots of source on it, but not the source of all the apps, as it wouldn't fit on one CD -- but it's all open source, so I can provide download links, and indeed there is a page with many links.

And you're right, the only extra thing added to these open source apps (plus the Planmaker/Opera exceptions) is the scripts. It's the scripts that make Puppy what he is, and they are by nature open source.
There is absolutely nothing that we/I have put into Puppy anywhere that is closed source.

But, Puppy is no different from any of the other small distros. DSL, for example, sells a CD, binary only, no source. Austrumi has Opera. SAM has Planmaker, Textmaker."

The section in question of the GPL is :

source links are provided in a variety of places
and Barry's modifications by their very nature are open source as they are scripts ...

Code:

3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:

Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,

Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,

Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)

The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable.

If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not compelled to copy the source along with the object code.

Which is why commercial distro's have to include source CD's ... Unless Barry sells a CD and doesn't include the sources for all GPL packages on the CD there isn't a problem.

AS FOUNDER AND COORDINATOR OF THE 'Puppy Linux Project' [ESTABLISHED JANUARY 2003, FIRST USED IN COMMERCE (WEB SITE) 18-JUNE-2003], I HEREBY MAKE TRADEMARK CLAIM TO THE NAME AND TYPED DRAWING OF 'Puppy Linux', 'PuppyOS' and 'Puppy' AS IT RELATES TO "computer operating system software to facilitate computer use and operation". DATED 18-SEPTEMBER-2006. SIGNED BARRY D KAULER.